[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca592d60-9a5b-dec3-9565-76cd5c0740e0@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 11:27:49 +0800
From: liulongfang <liulongfang@...wei.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
<jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>, <cohuck@...hat.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxarm@...neuler.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/5] hisi_acc_vfio_pci: register debugfs for hisilicon
migration driver
On 2023/4/14 20:24, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 03:42:22PM +0800, Longfang Liu wrote:
>> +static int hisi_acc_vf_debug_restore(struct seq_file *seq, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct device *vf_dev = seq->private;
>> + struct vfio_pci_core_device *core_device = dev_get_drvdata(vf_dev);
>> + struct vfio_device *vdev = &core_device->vdev;
>> + struct hisi_acc_vf_core_device *hisi_acc_vdev = hisi_acc_get_vf_dev(vdev);
>> + struct hisi_acc_vf_migration_file *migf = hisi_acc_vdev->debug_migf;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = hisi_acc_vf_debug_check(seq, vdev);
>> + if (ret)
>> + goto restore_err;
>> +
>> + ret = vf_qm_state_save(hisi_acc_vdev, migf);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "failed to save device data!");
>> + goto restore_err;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = vf_qm_check_match(hisi_acc_vdev, migf);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "failed to match the VF!");
>> + goto restore_err;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = vf_qm_load_data(hisi_acc_vdev, migf);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "failed to recover the VF!");
>> + goto restore_err;
>> + }
>> +
>> + vf_qm_fun_reset(&hisi_acc_vdev->vf_qm);
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "successful to resume device data!");
>> +
>> +restore_err:
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> This is basically an in-kernel self test, it should be protected with
> some kind of VFIO selftest kconfig.
>
As a debugfs function, its usage will be more flexible for users.
> Though, I wonder why we need it???
After a live migration error occurs. Through this debugfs function,
you can perform separate functional tests on the source and destination
to locate the cause of the error.
Can't you write a trivial userspace
> program under tools/testing to do this sequence with the ioctls?
>
Sorry, I still wish this feature was a simple debugfs feature.
If you want the userspace testing tool you mentioned,
you can try it on mlx5.
Thanks,
Longfang.
>> +static int hisi_acc_vf_debug_save(struct seq_file *seq, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct device *vf_dev = seq->private;
>> + struct vfio_pci_core_device *core_device = dev_get_drvdata(vf_dev);
>> + struct vfio_device *vdev = &core_device->vdev;
>> + struct hisi_acc_vf_core_device *hisi_acc_vdev = hisi_acc_get_vf_dev(vdev);
>> + struct hisi_acc_vf_migration_file *migf = hisi_acc_vdev->debug_migf;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = hisi_acc_vf_debug_check(seq, vdev);
>> + if (ret)
>> + goto save_err;
>> +
>> + ret = vf_qm_state_save(hisi_acc_vdev, migf);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "failed to save device data!");
>> + goto save_err;
>> + }
>> + seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", "successful to save device data!");
>> +
>> +save_err:
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> Same kind of commen there, this is a selftest, why does it need a
> special kernel interface?
>
> .. and so on..
>
> I thought the non-selftesty bits were OK, maybe split the patch to
> match progress
>
> Jason
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists